USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Ground-water Series”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS1999

Availability of Ground-Water Data For California, Water Year 1998

The Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local water agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the ground-water resources of California each water year. These data constitute a valuable data base for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. Beginning with the 1985 water year and continuing through 1993, these data were published in a report series entitled ?Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data.? Prior to the introduction of this series, historical ground-water information was published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers. In 1994, the Volume 5 Ground-Water Data report was discontinued, but data continue to be available in our data bases. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to ground-water data for 1998. The 2-page report contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level and water-quality data for the current water year (fig. 2) and instructions for obtaining this and other ground-water information contained in the data bases of the Water Resources Division, California District.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS1999

Documentation for HYDMOD; a program for extracting and processing time-series data from the U.S. Geological Survey's modular three-dimensional finite-difference ground-water flow model

This report presents a FORTRAN computer program that generates simulated time-series data as output from the U.S. Geological Survey Modular Finite-Difference Ground-Water Flow Model at user-specified point locations or a collection of points that compose a profile through the modeled region. The program can save time-series data at user-specified locations for simulated water levels, drawdown, critical head, compaction, subsidence, streamflow, streamflow stage, and streamflow leakage. A set of locations also can be specified to create time-series profiles through the model. These data can be used to establish the performance of the model and can help with model calibration and other forms of flow-system and water-resource analysis.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2010

Groundwater Levels for Selected Wells in the Chehalis River Basin, Washington

Groundwater levels for selected wells in the Chehalis River basin, Washington, are presented on an interactive web-based map to document the spatial distribution of groundwater levels in the study area during late summer 2009. Groundwater level data and well information were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey using standard techniques. The data are stored in the USGS National Water Information System (NWIS), Ground-Water Site-Inventory (GWSI) System.

Data Series↗
USGS2000

Water Resources Data, Maine, Water Year 2000

This volume of the annual hydrologic data report of Maine is one of a series of annual reports that document data gathered from the U.S. Geological Survey's surface- and ground-water data-collection networks in each State, Puerto Rico, and the Trust Territories. These records of streamflow, ground-water levels, and quality of water provide the hydrologic information needed by State, local, and Federal agencies, and the private sector for developing and managing our Nation's land and water resources.

Maine↗
USGS2011

Thermal profiles for selected river reaches in the Stillaguamish River basin, Washington, August 2011

Datums Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). Abstract Longitudinal profiles of near-streambed temperature were collected for eight river reaches in the Stillaguamish River basin, Washington, during August 2011, to provide information about areas of groundwater discharge to streams. During summer, groundwater discharge can be a source of cold water to streams that regulates warm stream temperatures creating cold-water thermal refugia for native stream biota including salmon and trout. To assess areas of groundwater discharge to streams, temperature was measured using a probe with an internal datalogger towed behind a watercraft moving downstream at ambient stream velocity. The data were referenced to location, concurrently surveyed with a Global Positioning System, during collection of the water temperature data. Data are presented as Microsoft Excel® files consisting of date and time, near-streambed water temperature, and latitude and longitude. Introduction Longitudinal profiles of near-streambed temperatures surveyed at ambient river velocity in a Lagrangian framework provide information about potential areas of groundwater discharge as well as salmonid habitat and thermal refugia (Vaccaro and Maloy, 2006). Longitudinal thermal profiles have previously been surveyed in several rivers in Washington, including the Yakima River and tributaries (Vaccaro and others, 2008) and the Nooksack River (Cox and others, 2005). This report presents eight thermal profiles within the Stillaguamish River basin including parts of the North Fork Stillaguamish River, South Fork Stillaguamish River, Jim Creek, and Pilchuck Creek (fig. 1). This data augments previous investigations of longitudinal temperature variations within the Stillaguamish River and tributaries by thermal infrared radar by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Watershed Sciences, 2002), and may be used as a tool to develop a better understanding of groundwater/surface-water interactions within the Stillaguamish River basin. Purpose and Scope The purpose of this report is to present longitudinal thermal profiles of stream temperature of streams within the Stillaguamish River basin including the North Fork Stillaguamish River, the South Fork Stillaguamish River, Pilchuck Creek, and Jim Creek. This data may be used to determine zones of groundwater discharge and improve understanding of the relation between the groundwater and surface water systems of the Stillaguamish River basin. Description of Study Area The Stillaguamish River basin is in northwestern Washington and is bounded to the east by the Cascade Mountains, to the west by Puget Sound, to the north by the Skagit River basin, and to the south by the Snohomish River basin (fig. 1). The Stillaguamish River basin is characterized by cool, wet winters and warm, dry summers. Mean annual discharge of the North Fork Stillaguamish River (North Fork Stillaguamish River near Arlington, Washington, USGS gaging station 12167000) for water years 1929-2010 is 1,898 ft 3 /s and mean annual discharge of the South Fork Stillaguamish River (South Fork Stillaguamish River near Granite Falls, Washington gaging station 12161000) for water years 1929-1980 is 1,071 ft 3 /s. Jim Creek is a tributary of the South Fork Stillaguamish River and Pilchuck Creek is a tributary of the mainstem Stillaguamish River. Thermal Profile Survey Continuous water temperature and Global Positioning System (GPS) data were collected at 3-second intervals while drifting downstream at ambient stream velocity in a Lagrangian framework following the method of Vaccaro and Maloy (2006) for Pilchuck Creek between river mile (RM) 0.0 and 3.7 (table 1); the North Fork Stillaguamish River between RM 0.0 and 34.2 (tables 2-5); South Fork Stillaguamish River between RM 17.7 and 33.4 (tables 6-7); and Jim Creek between RM 0.0 and 7.0 (table 8). Profiling at ambient stream velocity in a Lagrangian framework tracks a parcel of water as it moves downstream during the day; departures from the diurnal heating cycle may be due to groundwater input, surface-water inflows, or riparian shading. Continuous temperature was measured using a Solinst® Levelogger LT temperature probe verified by a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) certified thermistor and position data was measured using a Garmin® GPSmap® 60Csx for the eight surveys during August 15-26, 2011. The temperature probe was towed behind a watercraft following the stream thalweg and dragged along the streambed except when in-stream obstacles prevented probe movement downstream. The location of each temperature measurement was determined by relating the time stamp of the GPS data to the temperature data. If a GPS location was not recorded at the same time as a temperature measurement, the location of the temperature measurement was determined by linear interpolation of the two GPS known locations that bracket the time of the temperature measurement. A 0.5-mi gap exists between the beginning of the North Fork Stillaguamish datasets collected on August 18 (table 4) and August 22 (table 5) because of inadequate equilibration of the temperature probe to ambient stream temperature during the initial 0.5 mi of the August 22 survey. Distribution of Information An Excel file of tables 1-8 that include the thermal-profile data for each longitudinal thermal profile is available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/654/ds654_tables.xls. Table 1. Temperature and Global Positioning System location data for the Pilchuck Creek (RM 0.0-3.7), August 15, 2011. Table 2. Temperature and Global Positioning System location data for the North Fork Stillaguamish River (RM 30.0-34.2), August 16, 2011. Table 3. Temperature and Global Positioning System location data for the North Fork Stillaguamish River (RM 17.6-30.0), August 17, 2011. Table 4. Temperature and Global Positioning System location data for the North Fork Stillaguamish River (RM 9.5-17.6), August 18, 2011. Table 5. Temperature and Global Positioning System location data for the North Fork Stillaguamish River (RM 0.0-9.0), August 22, 2011. Table 6. Temperature and Global Positioning System location data for the South Fork Stillaguamish River (RM 25.9-33.4), August 24, 2011. Table 7. Temperature and Global Positioning System location data for the South Fork Stillaguamish River (RM 17.7-25.9), August 26, 2011. Table 8. Temperature and Global Positioning System location data for Jim Creek (RM 0.0-7.0), August 25, 2011. References Cited Cox, S.E., Simonds, F.W., Doremus, L., Huffman, R.L., and Defawe, R.M., 2005, Ground water/surface water interactions and quality of discharging ground water in streams of the lower Nooksack River Basin, Whatcom County, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5255, 46 p Vaccaro, J.J., Keys, M.E., Julich, R.J., and Welch, W.B., 2008, Thermal profiles for selected river reaches in the Yakima River basin, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 342 (Available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/342/). Vaccaro, J.J., and Maloy, K.J., 2006, A thermal profile method to identify potential ground-water discharge areas and preferred salmonid habitats for long river reaches: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5136, 16 p. Watershed Sciences, LLC, 2002, Aerial surveys in the Stillaguamish and Skagit River Basins-Thermal infrared and color videography: Corvallis, Oreg., Water Sciences, for Washington Department of Ecology, 28 p.

Data Series↗
USGS2011

Digitized generalized areas where surface-water resources likely or potentially are susceptible to groundwater withdrawals in adjacent valleys, Great Basin National Park area, Nevada

Abstract Polygons delineate generalized areas in and around Great Basin National Park where surface-water resources likely or potentially are susceptible to groundwater withdrawals in adjacent valleys. Purpose This data set was created as part of a U.S. Geological Survey study, done in cooperation with the National Park Service, to characterize surface-water resources in and around Great Basin National Park. The intended uses of this data set include, but are not limited to, natural resource modeling, mapping, and visualization applications. Source Information SIR 2006-5099, Plate 1: Generalized areas where surface-water resources likely or potentially are susceptible to ground-water withdrawals in adjacent valleys, Great Basin National Park area, Nevada.

Nevada↗
USGS2011

Principal facts for gravity stations collected in 2010 from White Pine and Lincoln Counties, east-central Nevada

Increasing demands on the Colorado River system within the arid Southwestern United States have focused attention on finding new, alternative sources of water. Particular attention is being paid to the eastern Great Basin, where important ground-water systems occur within a regionally extensive sequence of Paleozoic carbonate rocks and in the Cenozoic basin-fill deposits that occur throughout the region. Geophysical investigations to characterize the geologic framework of aquifers in eastern Nevada and western Utah began in a series of cooperative agreements between the U.S. Geological Survey and the Southern Nevada Water Authority in 2003. These studies were intended to better understand the formation of basins, define their subsurface shape and depth, and delineate structures that may impede or enhance groundwater flow. We have combined data from gravity stations established during the current study with previously available data to produce an up-to-date isostatic-gravity map of the study area, using a gravity inversion method to calculate depths to pre-Cenozoic basement rock and to estimate alluvial/volcanic fill in the valleys.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2017

A foundation for future assessment and management of groundwater resources

Sequence stratigraphic models for the Pleistocene to Holocene sediments of the Los Angeles (LA) Basin will provide better understanding of regional groundwater flow and have helped identify seawater intrusion pathways into important groundwater aquifers. Because groundwater provides more than one-third of the municipal water supply for the coastal LA Basin, the aquifer architecture of this system is a high priority for groundwater managers. Seismic and sequence stratigraphy are now incorporated into groundwater resource assessments and environmental investigations. By evaluating subsurface data using sequence stratigraphy, the geometry and distribution of aquifer and aquitard sediments are defined, thus groundwater contaminant plumes and sea water intrusion pathways are better understood. The U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with Los Angeles County Department of Public Works and the Water Replenishment District of Southern California undertook an investigation of the groundwater stratigraphy of the Wilmington – Long Beach area of the LA Basin. Sequence stratigraphic methods were used to integrate preexisting groundwater well data with: (1) new borehole observations, (2) structural and physical properties data derived from geophysical measurements, (3) hi-resolution seismic reflection data obtained offshore of the present shoreline, and (4) vintage oil company exploration seismic reflection data from both onshore and offshore of the shoreline. These data were used to construct a series of Pleistocene to Holocene environment of deposition maps that show the overall progradation of sequences seaward over time. In addition, seawater intrusion pathways into coastal groundwater aquifers were identified and mapped. On a more regional scale, a vintage Texaco seismic reflection data set from the greater LA Basin was interpreted and integrated with a regional network of multi-level ground-water monitoring wells. The sequence stratigraphic correlation shows that many of the defined groundwater aquifers are not correlative. For example, one of the major groundwater supply aquifers, the Silverado Aquifer, when tied to the seismic reflection data has different ages depending on location. This new understanding demonstrates the need for a re-evaluation of the Pleistocene to Holocene stratigraphy using existing seismic reflection data integrated with well data from the LA Basin in order to understand the regional distribution of groundwater aquifers.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2016

Hydrologic response of desert wetlands to Holocene climate change: preliminary results from the Soda Springs area, Mojave National Preserve, California

Desert wetlands are common features in arid environments and include a variety of hydrologic facies, including seeps, springs, marshes, wet meadows, ponds, and spring pools. Wet ground conditions and dense stands of vegetation in these settings combine to trap eolian, alluvial, and fluvial sediments that accumulate over time. The resulting deposits are collectively called ground-water discharge (GWD) deposits, and contain information on how small desert watersheds responded to climate change in the past. Most GWD studies in the southwestern U.S. have focused on the late Pleistocene because the Holocene was too dry to support the extensive wetland systems that were so pervasive just a few millennia earlier. Here we describe the results of a pilot project that involves coring extant wetlands and analyzing the sedimentology and microfauna of the recovered sediment to infer Holocene hydrologic conditions. In 2011, a series of cores were taken near wetlands situated along the western margin of the Soda Lake basin in the Mojave National Preserve of southern California. The core sediments appear to show that the wetlands responded to the relatively minor climate fluctuations that characterized the Holocene. However, our analysis was limited by relatively low sediment recovery (which only averaged 70-80%) and a general paucity of datable materials in the cores. Additional studies aimed at improving recovery and developing new techniques for concentrating plant microfossils (plant remains that are <150 m in diameter) for radiocarbon dating are ongoing.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2014

U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, Carlsbad, New Mexico, April 29-May 2, 2014

Karst aquifer systems are present throughout parts of the United States and some of its territories, and have developed in carbonate rocks (primarily limestone and dolomite) that span an interval of time encompassing more than 550 million years. The depositional environments, diagenetic processes, post-depositional tectonic events, and geochemical weathering processes that form karst aquifers are varied and complex, and involve biological, chemical, and physical changes. These factors, combined with the diverse climatic regimes under which karst development in these rocks has taken place, result in the unique dual- or triple-porosity nature of karst aquifers. These complex hydrogeologic systems typically represent challenging and unique conditions to scientists attempting to study groundwater flow and contaminant transport in these terrains. The dissolution of carbonate rocks and the subsequent development of distinct and beautiful landscapes, caverns, and springs has resulted in the most exceptional karst areas of the United States being designated as national or state parks; commercial caverns and known privately owned caves number in the tens of thousands. Both public and private properties provide access for scientists to study the flow of groundwater in situ. Likewise, the range and complexity of landforms and groundwater flow systems associated with karst terrains are enormous, perhaps more than for any other aquifer type. Karst aquifers and landscapes that form in tropical areas, such as the cockpit karst along the north coast of Puerto Rico, differ greatly from karst landforms in more arid climates, such as the Edwards Plateau in west-central Texas or the Guadalupe Mountains near Carlsbad, New Mexico, where hypogenic processes have played a major role in speleogenesis. Many of these public and private lands also contain unique flora and fauna associated with these karst hydrogeologic systems. As a result, numerous federal, state, and local agencies have a strong interest in the study of karst terrains. Many of the major springs and aquifers in the United States have developed in carbonate rocks, such as the Floridan aquifer system in Florida and parts of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina; the Ozark Plateaus aquifer system in parts of Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma; and the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system in west-central Texas. These aquifers, and the springs that discharge from them, serve as major water-supply sources and as unique ecological habitats. Competition for the water resources of karst aquifers is common, and urban development and the lack of attenuation of contaminants in karst areas can impact the ecosystem and water quality of these aquifers. The concept for developing a platform for interaction among scientists within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) working on karst-related studies evolved from the November 1999 National Ground-Water Meeting of the USGS. As a result, the Karst Interest Group (KIG) was formed in 2000. The KIG is a loose-knit, grass-roots organization of USGS and non-USGS scientists and researchers devoted to fostering better communication among scientists working on, or interested in, karst science. The primary mission of the KIG is to encourage and support interdisciplinary collaboration and technology transfer among scientists working in karst areas. Additionally, the KIG encourages collaborative studies between the different mission areas of the USGS as well as other federal and state agencies, and with researchers from academia and institutes. The KIG also encourages younger scientists by participation of students in the poster and oral sessions. To accomplish its mission, the KIG has organized a series of workshops that are held near nationally important karst areas. To date (2014) six KIG workshops, including the workshop documented in this report, have been held. The workshops typically include oral and poster sessions on selected karst-related topics and research, as well as field trips to local karst features. Proceedings of the workshops are published by the USGS and are available online at http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/karst/kig . The first KIG workshop was held in St. Petersburg, Florida, February 13–16, 2001, in the vicinity of the large springs and other karst features of the Floridan aquifer system. The second KIG workshop was held August 20–22, 2002, in Shepherdstown, West Virginia, in proximity to the carbonate aquifers of the northern Shenandoah Valley and highlighted an invited presentation on karst literature by the late Barry F. Beck of P.E. LaMoreaux and Associates. The third KIG workshop was held September 12–15, 2005, in Rapid City, South Dakota, nearby to karst features in evaporites and limestones of the Madison Group in the Black Hills of South Dakota, including Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument. The workshop also included a featured presentation by Thomas Casadevall, Central Region Director, USGS, on the status of earth science at the USGS and evening trips to Jewel Cave led by Mike Wiles, National Park Service (NPS) and Wind Cave led by Rod Horrocks, NPS. The fourth KIG workshop was held May 27–29, 2008, and hosted by the Hoffman Environmental Research Institute and Center for Cave and Karst Studies at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green, Kentucky, near Mammoth Cave National Park and karst features of the Chester Upland and Pennyroyal Plateau. The workshop featured a late-night field trip into Mammoth Cave with Rickard Toomey and Rick Olsen, NPS. The fifth workshop was held April 26–29, 2011, and was a joint meeting of the USGS KIG and University of Arkansas HydroDays, hosted by the Department of Geosciences at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. The workshop featured an outstanding field trip to the unique karst terrain along the Buffalo National River of the southern Ozarks and a keynote presentation on paleokarst in the United States by Art and Peggy Palmer. This sixth and current 2014 KIG workshop is hosted by the National Cave and Karst Research Institute (NCKRI) in Carlsbad, New Mexico, with Director of NCKRI, George Veni, serving as co-chair of the workshop with Eve Kuniansky, USGS. The session planning committee for this sixth workshop includes Van Brahana, USGS retired and University of Arkansas Professor Emeritus; Tom Byl, USGS and Tennessee State University; Zelda Bailey, former Director of NCKRI and retired Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Boulder Laboratory, Colorado; Patrick Tucci, USGS retired; and Mike Bradley, Allan Clark, Geoff Delin, Daniel Doctor, James Kaufmann, Eve Kuniansky, Randy Orndorff, Larry Spangler, and Dave Weary of the USGS. The karst hydrology field trip on Thursday will be led by Lewis Land (NCKRI karst hydrologist) and the optional Friday field trip on the geology of Carlsbad Caverns National Park will be led by George Veni. The keynote speaker is Dr. Penelope Boston, Director of Cave and Karst Studies at New Mexico Tech, Socorro, and Academic Director at NCKRI, who will address the future of karst research. Additionally, there is a featured presentation “Irish karst and its management,” by Caoimhe Hickey, The Geological Survey of Ireland, preceding a panel discussion on “Collaboration During Times of Limited Resources.” The extended abstracts of USGS authors were peer reviewed and approved for publication by the U.S. Geological Survey. Articles submitted by university researchers and other federal and state agencies did not go through the formal USGS peer review and approval process, and therefore may not adhere to our editorial standards or stratigraphic nomenclature and is not research conducted or data collected by the USGS. However, all articles had at a minimum of two peer reviews, and all articles were edited for consistency of appearance in the published Proceedings. The use of trade, firm or product names in any article is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. The USGS, Office of Groundwater, provides technical support for the Karst Interest Group website and public availability of the Proceedings from these workshops, and the USGS Groundwater Resources Program funds the publication costs. Finally, the cover illustration is the work of Ann Tihansky, USGS, used since the first KIG workshop in 2000.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2010

Attributes for NHDPlus Catchments (Version 1.1) for the Conterminous United States: Estimated Mean Annual Natural Groundwater Recharge, 2002

This data set represents the mean annual natural groundwater recharge, in millimeters, compiled for every catchment of NHDPlus for the conterminous United States. The source data set is Estimated Mean Annual Natural Ground-Water Recharge in the Conterminous United States (Wolock, 2003). The NHDPlus Version 1.1 is an integrated suite of application-ready geospatial datasets that incorporates many of the best features of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and the National Elevation Dataset (NED). The NHDPlus includes a stream network (based on the 1:100,00-scale NHD), improved networking, naming, and value-added attributes (VAAs). NHDPlus also includes elevation-derived catchments (drainage areas) produced using a drainage enforcement technique first widely used in New England, and thus referred to as "the New England Method." This technique involves "burning in" the 1:100,000-scale NHD and when available building "walls" using the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD). The resulting modified digital elevation model (HydroDEM) is used to produce hydrologic derivatives that agree with the NHD and WBD. Over the past two years, an interdisciplinary team from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and contractors, found that this method produces the best quality NHD catchments using an automated process (USEPA, 2007). The NHDPlus dataset is organized by 18 Production Units that cover the conterminous United States. The NHDPlus version 1.1 data are grouped by the U.S. Geologic Survey's Major River Basins (MRBs, Crawford and others, 2006). MRB1, covering the New England and Mid-Atlantic River basins, containing NHDPlus Production Units 1 and 2. MRB2, covering the South Atlantic-Gulf and Tennessee River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 3 and 6. MRB3, covering the Great Lakes, Ohio, Upper Mississippi, and Souris-Red-Rainy River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 4, 5, 7 and 9. MRB4, covering the Missouri River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 10-lower and 10-upper. MRB5, covering the Lower Mississippi, Arkansas-White-Red, and Texas-Gulf River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 8, 11 and 12. MRB6, covering the Rio Grande, Colorado and Great Basin River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Units 13, 14, 15 and 16. MRB7, covering the Pacific Northwest River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 17. MRB8, covering California River basins, contains NHDPlus Production Unit 18.

Data Series↗
USGS2013

Simulation of climate-change effects on streamflow, lake water budgets, and stream temperature using GSFLOW and SNTEMP, Trout Lake Watershed, Wisconsin

Although groundwater and surface water are considered a single resource, historically hydrologic simulations have not accounted for feedback loops between the groundwater system and other hydrologic processes. These feedbacks include timing and rates of evapotranspiration, surface runoff, soil-zone flow, and interactions with the groundwater system. Simulations that iteratively couple the surface-water and groundwater systems, however, are characterized by long run times and calibration challenges. In this study, calibrated, uncoupled transient surface-water and steady-state groundwater models were used to construct one coupled transient groundwater/surface-water model for the Trout Lake Watershed in north-central Wisconsin, USA. The computer code GSFLOW (Ground-water/Surface-water FLOW) was used to simulate the coupled hydrologic system; a surface-water model represented hydrologic processes in the atmosphere, at land surface, and within the soil-zone, and a groundwater-flow model represented the unsaturated zone, saturated zone, stream, and lake budgets. The coupled GSFLOW model was calibrated by using heads, streamflows, lake levels, actual evapotranspiration rates, solar radiation, and snowpack measurements collected during water years 1998–2007; calibration was performed by using advanced features present in the PEST parameter estimation software suite. Simulated streamflows from the calibrated GSFLOW model and other basin characteristics were used as input to the one-dimensional SNTEMP (Stream-Network TEMPerature) model to simulate daily stream temperature in selected tributaries in the watershed. The temperature model was calibrated to high-resolution stream temperature time-series data measured in 2002. The calibrated GSFLOW and SNTEMP models were then used to simulate effects of potential climate change for the period extending to the year 2100. An ensemble of climate models and emission scenarios was evaluated. Downscaled climate drivers for the period 2010–2100 showed increases in maximum and minimum temperature over the scenario period. Scenarios of future precipitation did not show a monotonic trend like temperature. Uncertainty in the climate drivers increased over time for both temperature and precipitation. Separate calibration of the uncoupled groundwater and surface-water models did not provide a representative initial parameter set for coupled model calibration. A sequentially linked calibration, in which the uncoupled models were linked by means of utility software, provided a starting parameter set suitable for coupled model calibration. Even with sequentially linked calibration, however, transmissivity of the lower part of the aquifer required further adjustment during coupled model calibration to attain reasonable parameter values for evaporation rates off a small seepage lake (a lake with no appreciable surface-water outlets) with a long history of study. The resulting coupled model was well calibrated to most types of observed time-series data used for calibration. Daily stream temperatures measured during 2002 were successfully simulated with SNTEMP; the model fit was acceptable for a range of groundwater inflow rates into the streams. Forecasts of potential climate change scenarios showed growing season length increasing by weeks, and both potential and actual evapotranspiration rates increasing appreciably, in response to increasing air temperature. Simulated actual evapotranspiration rates increased less than simulated potential evapotranspiration rates as a result of water limitation in the root zone during the summer high-evapotranspiration period. The hydrologic-system response to climate change was characterized by a reduction in the importance of the snow-melt pulse and an increase in the importance of fall and winter groundwater recharge. The less dynamic hydrologic regime is likely to result in drier soil conditions in rainfed wetlands and uplands, in contrast to less drying in groundwater-fed systems. Seepage lakes showed larger forecast stage declines related to climate change than did drainage lakes (lakes with outlet streams). Seepage lakes higher in the watershed (nearer to groundwater divides) had less groundwater inflow and thus had larger forecast declines in lake stage; however, ground-water inflow to seepage lakes in general tended to increase as a fraction of the lake budgets with lake-stage decline because inward hydraulic gradients increased. Drainage lakes were characterized by less simulated stage decline as reductions in outlet streamflow of set losses to other water flows. Net groundwater inflow tended to decrease in drainage lakes over the scenario period. Simulated stream temperatures increased appreciably with climate change. The estimated increase in annual average temperature ranged from approximately 1 to 2 degrees Celsius by 2100 in the stream characterized by a high groundwater inflow rate and 2 to 3 degrees Celsius in the stream with a lower rate. The climate drivers used for the climate-change scenarios had appreciable variation between the General Circulation Model and emission scenario selected; this uncertainty was reflected in hydrologic flow and temperature model results. Thus, as with all forecasts of this type, the results are best considered to approximate potential outcomes of climate change.

Wisconsin↗
USGS2011

Data compilation and assessment for water resources in Pennsylvania state forest and park lands

As a result of a cooperative study between the U.S. Geological Survey and the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (PaDCNR), available electronic data were compiled for Pennsylvania state lands (state forests and parks) to allow PaDCNR to initially determine if data exist to make an objective evaluation of water resources for specific basins. The data compiled included water-quantity and water-quality data and sample locations for benthic macroinvertebrates within state-owned lands (including a 100-meter buffer around each land parcel) in Pennsylvania. In addition, internet links or contacts for geographic information system coverages pertinent to water-resources studies also were compiled. Water-quantity and water-quality data primarily available through January 2007 were compiled and summarized for site types that included streams, lakes, ground-water wells, springs, and precipitation. Data were categorized relative to 35 watershed boundaries defined by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection for resource-management purposes. The primary sources of continuous water-quantity data for Pennsylvania state lands were the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the National Weather Service (NWS). The USGS has streamflow data for 93 surface-water sites located in state lands; 38 of these sites have continuous-recording data available. As of January 2007, 22 of these 38 streamflow-gaging stations were active; the majority of active gaging stations have over 40 years of continuous record. The USGS database also contains continuous ground-water elevation data for 32 wells in Pennsylvania state lands, 18 of which were active as of January 2007. Sixty-eight active precipitation stations (primarily from the NWS network) are located in state lands. The four sources of available water-quality data for Pennsylvania state lands were the USGS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PaDEP), and the Susquehanna River Basin Commission. The water-quality data, which were primarily collected after 1970, were summarized by categorizing the analytical data for each site into major groups (for example, trace metals, pesticides, major ions, etc.) for each type (streams, lakes, ground-water wells, and springs) of data compiled. The number of samples and number of detections for each analyte within each group also were summarized. A total of 410 stream sites and 205 ground-water wells in state lands had water-quality data from the available data sets, and these sites were well-distributed across the state. A total of 107 lakes and 47 springs in state lands had water-quality data from the available data sets, but these data types were not well-distributed across the state; the majority of water-quality data for lakes was in the western or eastern sections of the state and water-quality data for springs was primarily located in the central part of the Lower Susquehanna River Valley. The most common types of water-quality data collected were major ions, trace elements, and nutrients. Physical parameters, such as water temperature, stream discharge, or water level, typically were collected for most water-quality samples. Given the large database available from PaDEP for benthic macroinvertebrates, along with some data from other agencies, there is very good distribution of benthic-macroinvertebrate data for state lands. Benthic macroinvertebrate samples were collected at 1,077 locations in state lands from 1973 to 2006. Most (980 samples) of the benthic-macroinvertebrate samples were collected by PaDEP as part of the state assessment of stream conditions required by the Clean Water Act. Data compiled in this report can be used for various water-resource issues, such as basin-wide water-budget analysis, studies of ecological or instream flow, or water-quality assessments. The determination of an annual water budget in selected basins is best supported by the availab

Pennsylvania↗
USGS2010

Selected water-quality data from the Cedar River and Cedar Rapids well fields, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, 1999–2005

The Cedar River alluvial aquifer is the primary source of municipal water in the Cedar Rapids, Iowa area. Municipal wells are completed in the alluvial aquifer at approximately 40 to 80 feet deep. The City of Cedar Rapids and the U.S. Geological Survey have been conducting a cooperative study of the groundwater-flow system and water quality near the well fields since 1992. Previous cooperative studies between the City of Cedar Rapids and the U.S. Geological Survey have documented hydrologic and water-quality data, geochemistry, and groundwater models. Water-quality samples were collected for studies involving well field monitoring, trends, source-water protection, groundwater geochemistry, evaluation of surface and ground-water interaction, assessment of pesticides in groundwater and surface water, and to evaluate water quality near a wetland area in the Seminole well field. Typical water-quality analyses included major ions (boron, bromide, calcium, chloride, fluoride, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, silica, sodium, and sulfate), nutrients (ammonia as nitrogen, nitrite as nitrogen, nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen, and orthophosphate as phosphorus), dissolved organic carbon, and selected pesticides including two degradates of the herbicide atrazine. In addition, two synoptic samplings included analyses of additional pesticide degradates in water samples. Physical field parameters (alkalinity, dissolved oxygen, pH, specific conductance and water temperature) were recorded with each water sample collected. This report presents the results of water quality data-collection activities from January 1999 through December 2005. Methods of data collection, quality-assurance samples, water-quality analyses, and statistical summaries are presented. Data include the results of water-quality analyses from quarterly and synoptic sampling from monitoring wells, municipal wells, and the Cedar River.

iowa↗
USGS1988

General hydrogeology of the aquifers of Mesozoic age, Upper Colorado River Basin - excluding the San Juan Basin - Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and Arizona

The objective of the Upper Colorado Regional Aquifer Systems Analyses (RASA) project is to assess quantitatively the occurrence, movement, and availability of water stored in rock formations underlying the basin. This is one of a series of preliminary reports that describe what is currently known (1984) about the geometry and hydrologic properties of the aquifer systems, and the chemistry of the water in known or potential aquifers. This report provides the foundation needed for the assessment of the ground-water resources of the region. The report describes only part of the hydrologic system; that is, formations of Mesozoic age. Younger and older formations significant to the hydrologic system are described in other reports.

Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming↗
USGS2011

Hydrogeology and simulation of groundwater flow in fractured rock in the Newark basin, Rockland County, New York

Groundwater in the Newark basin aquifer flows primarily through discrete water-bearing zones parallel to the strike and dip of bedding, whereas flow perpendicular to the strike is restricted, thereby imparting anisotropy to the groundwater flow field. The finite-element model SUTRA was used to represent bedrock structure in the aquifer by spatially varying the orientation of the hydraulic conductivity tensor to reflect variations in the strike and dip of the bedding. Directions of maximum and medium hydraulic conductivity were oriented parallel to the bedding, and the direction of minimum hydraulic conductivity was oriented perpendicular to the bedding. Groundwater flow models were prepared to simulate local flow in the vicinity of the Spring Valley well field and regional flow through the Newark basin aquifer. The Newark basin contains sedimentary rocks deposited as alluvium during the Late Triassic and is one of a series of basins that developed when Mesozoic rifting of the super continent Pangea created the Atlantic Ocean. The westward-dipping basin is filled with interbedded facies of coarse-grained to fine-grained rocks that were intruded by diabase associated with Jurassic volcanism. The Newark basin aquifer is bounded to the north and east by the Palisades sill and to the west by the Ramapo Fault. Although the general dip of bedding is toward the fault, mapping of conglomerate beds indicates the rocks are folded into broad anticlines and synclines. An alternative, more uniform pattern of regional structure, based on interpolated strike and dip measurements from a number of sources, has also been proposed. Two groundwater flow models (A for the former type of bedrock structure and B for the latter type) were developed to represent these alternative depictions of bedrock structure. Transient simulations were calibrated to reproduce measured water-level recoveries in a 9.3 mi&sup2 area surrounding the Spring Valley well field during a 5-day aquifer test in 1992. The models represented a 330-ft thick rock mass divided vertically into 10 equally spaced layers and were calibrated through nonlinear regression. Results of model B best matched the observed water-level recoveries with an estimated hydraulic conductivity of 9.5 ft/day, specific storage of 7.6 x 10 -6 ft -1, and K max : K min anisotropy ratio (hydraulic conductivity parallel to bedding: perpendicular to bedding) of 72:1. Model error was 50 percent greater in model A because the assumed structure did not match the actual strike of bedding in this area. Steady-state simulations of regional flow through the 85.4-mi2 modeled extent of the Newark basin aquifer represented both the alluvial aquifer beneath the Mawah River and the fractured bedrock. The rock mass was divided into two aquifer units: an upper 500-ft thick unit divided into 10 equally spaced layers through which most groundwater is assumed to flow and a lower unit divided into 7 layers with increasing thickness. Models were calibrated through nonlinear regression to average water levels measured in 140 wells from August 2005 through April 2007. Water levels simulated using the two models were similar and generally matched those observed, and the average recharge rate estimated using both models was 19 inches/year for the simulated period. Estimated transmissivity parallel to the strike of bedding (1,100 ft&sup2/d) was uniform in two transmissivity (T) zones in model A, but in model B the transmissivity of a high T zone (1,600 ft&sup2/d), delineated on the basis of aquifer test data, was slightly greater than in a low T zone (1,300 ft&sup2/d). The K max : K min anisotropy was estimated to be 58:1 in model A and 410:1 in model B, so the proportion of flow perpendicular to bedding is less in model B than in model A. Distributions of groundwater age simulated with models A and B are similar and indicate that most shallow ground-water (225 ft below the bedrock surface) is 5 t

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2018

Groundwater chemistry and water-level elevations in bedrock aquifers of the Piceance and Yellow Creek watersheds, Rio Blanco County, Colorado, 2013–16

The Piceance and Yellow Creek watersheds in Rio Blanco County, Colorado, are known to contain important energy resources (oil shale and natural gas) and mineral resources (nahcolite). The primary sources of fresh groundwater in the Piceance and Yellow Creek watersheds are bedrock aquifers in the Uinta and Green River Formations. The aquifers are divided into an upper and lower aquifer separated by a regionally extensive semiconfining layer. These aquifers provide water to streams and springs in the watersheds and are an important resource to people living and working in the area. Development of energy and mineral resources has the potential to affect the quality of groundwater in several ways. The Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Geological Survey began groundwater monitoring in 2010 to characterize the groundwater quality and water-level elevations of shallow bedrock aquifers in the Piceance and Yellow Creek watersheds. The purpose of this report is to present ground-water chemistry and water-level elevations collected during 2013–16. Comparisons are made to data that were collected from the bedrock aquifers from 2010 to 2012 to identify the potential for changes in water quality and water-level elevations. Appreciable changes in water-level elevations and hydraulic gradient were observed in early April 2015 in two wells completed in the upper and lower aquifers. The hydraulic gradient between the two wells was consistently downward from the upper aquifer to the lower aquifer during 2010–15; however, in early April 2015, the gradient changed from downward to upward between the two aquifers. Overall, water-level elevations declined by about 14 and 11 feet in the upper and lower aquifers, respectively, from 2013 to 2016. Previously published data estimated groundwater ages at 1,200 years old in the upper aquifer and 9,600 years old in the lower aquifer. These groundwater ages indicate that ground-water was recharged over thousands of years. With such long periods of time for aquifer recharge, declines in water-level elevation over short time steps (a few months) have important implications for sustainable management of this resource. Solution mining activities or drilling for oil and natural gas in the area could be related to the changes observed in water-level elevations in these wells; however, further investigation would be needed to evaluate causation. Changes in major-ion chemistry were evaluated in the bedrock aquifer using time series plots of select major-ion data from 2010 to 2016. Major-ion chemistry was variable for a single well from 2010 to 2016 where alkalinity and sulfate were the most variable constituents. One possible explanation for the observed changes in major-ion chemistry may be that the sample depth for that well no longer represents the most appreciable flow in the borehole. On a larger scale, potential changes in flow within the borehole may indicate changes in the regional flow system. Methane and volatile organic compound concentrations were evaluated using a similar approach to that of major ions and had similar findings. Methane concentrations in wells sampled from 2010 to 2016 were generally constant. The only exception was observed at a single well where the range of methane concentrations was from 57.4 (2010) to 4.02 milligrams per liter (2013). This is the same well where changes in water-level elevation, hydraulic gradient, and major-ion chemistry were observed, providing multiple lines of evidence to indicate change in the bedrock aquifers. Sampling of a well located in an area with little energy development but where faults or fractures could provide a path for the migration of fluids indicate mixing of groundwater between the upper and lower aquifers.

Colorado↗
USGS2000

Water Resources Data: Hawaii and Other Pacific Areas, Water Year 1999. Volume 1. Hawaii

This report includes records on both surface and ground water in the State. Specifically, it contains: (1) Discharge records for 74 stream-gaging stations, 71 miscellaneous streamflow stations, and 88 crest-stage partial-record streamflow stations; (2) water-quality records for 6 streamflow-gaging stations, and 28 partial-record streamflow stations; (3) water-level records for 84 observation wells; (4) water-quality records for 122 observation wells; and (5) accumulated rainfall records for 40 rainfall stations. This series of annual reports for Hawaii began with the 1961 fiscal year (State of Hawaii) with a report that contained only data relating to the quantities of surface water. For the 1964 fiscal year, a similar report was introduced that contained only data relating to water quality. Beginning with the 1975 water year, the report format was changed to include, in one volume, data on quantities of surface water, quality of surface and ground water, and ground-water levels. Beginning with the 1993 water year, accumulated rainfall data were included in the report.

Water Data Report↗